Piltdown Superman

It must be stated that evolutionists and biblical creationists present material based on their worldviews. Unfortunately, professing Christians who ride for the Darwin brand elevate evolution over scriptural authority to the point of twisting the Bible to fit their presuppositions. Case in point, the creature known as Behemoth. Image source before modification: US National Archives (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Biblical creationists tend to believe that Behemoth described in the book of Job was probably a sauropod dinosaur that hadn't quite gotten the notion to go extinct yet, but evolutionists reject that out of hand. We also hold to the view that the Bible is inerrant in the original manuscripts, but liberals reject that. I reckon it makes it easier to perform eisegesis and tamper with meanings. We know that word meanings change over time and usage. Argument  is commonly used to describe an emotional exchange instead of a reasoned discussion and pr

While I want to cut some slack to evolutionists who are locked into their paradigms and do not think creatively, the secular science industry is infested with science deniers. The atheistic naturalism narrative is more important than facts and real science. Assembled with components from Clker clipart More and more fossils are referred to in terms of exceptional preservation, revealing evolution-defying details (like the fully-formed complex trilobite eyes ). Although there were indications that some fossils were not fully permineralized ( such as the use of octopus ink ), young earth evidence stormed the gates of evolutionism. All sorts of rescuing devices were utilized beyond reason; some things don't deteriorate (apparently if it is Darwin's will). Although there are soft tissues and such cropping up frequently (such in this recent duckbilled dinosaur dig ), they are preserved through the "exceptional conditions" that must have been common.  Now, thought

Many but not all Darwinists believe that birds evolved into dinosaurs. That concept is an assertion based on evolutionary presuppositions, not empirical science, old son. But the hands at the Darwin Ranch are all a-twitter over the discovery of soft dinosaur eggs. Fossilized dinosaur eggs at Indroda Fossil Park Image credit: Wikimedia Commons /  S. Ballal  ( CC by-SA 3.0 ) Since there is no evidence for dinosaur evolution (faith-based assertions are not evidence), their alleged history can be easily rewritten . Apparently different dinosaurs laid different kinds of eggs. A new discovery shows that some eggs were not like those of birds, and another egg discovered in Antarctica causes further difficulties. Also, the discoveries support claims of biblical creation science. Despite forcing the hands at the Darwin Ranch to put in overtime at the excuse mill, all they can come up with is the louche  explanation akin to "it evolved"  several times. Not hardly! A pair of ne

Back in 2017, we examined news of a nodosaur (related to the ankylosaur) in " Nodosaur News is Good News ". Biblical creationists were pleased with the findings, and further information provides additional support for the Genesis Flood. Darwin's fan club made some ridiculous statements. Suncor nodosaur fossil photo credit: Wikimedia Commons / Machairo / CC BY-SA 4.0 Secularists used their Charles Darwin Club Secret Decoder Rings™ to decide on the mendacity that something dies, sinks to the bottom of the water, gets gradually buried, then turns into a fossil — unbelievable. Anyone with a knowledge of animal death knows that there are scavengers, bacterial activity, and so on that will not leave something alone so it could fossilize. In this case, the nodosaur had all the signs of being buried rapidly. In fact, scientists were able to determine what it had eaten. Also, what was a land critter doing way out yonder in the sea and getting its ownself buried with thin

Those Jurassic Park/World movies took many liberties which included the speed of Tyrannosaurus rex and the increased size of the velociraptors . In their defense, the movies are money-making ventures to provide entertainment, not education. Also, new research on the critters came later. I have another rescuing device to offer. When we go to movies, watch television, or even when reading novels, we have to suspend our disbelief and accept that reality. The dinosaurs in the Jurassic flicks were modified dinosaurs, so T. rex was fast and velociraptors not only taught their young, but were much larger than the turkey-sized versions that were fossilized. But that's just for fun and we have some interesting research to ponder. Calculating body mass, bone density, comparison to living animals, and other factors, Tyrannosaurus rex was probably not entering foot races and jumping contests. A fall would probably be fatal, so it wouldn't be chasing after the other dinosaurs w

We recently saw how an odd critter known as the Tully monster has caused problems for evolutionists. While information can be obtained from fossils, it is limited. It becomes even more difficult for paleontologists when they have nothing to draw from for comparisons. A newly-discovered fossil of the spinosaurus (spine lizard) caused consternation because all of the assumptions were wrong. This is because it appears that the tail could have been used for swimming, and not many dinosaurs are known for being champion swimmers. Of course, a great deal of speculation exists in secular imaginations. Another crazy beast to consider was discovered in Madagascar in 1999 but not discussed so much until recently. Evolutionary history? This unique mammal not only interferes with evolutionary timelines (we've seen that happening quite a bit recently), but it has no so-called evolutionary history. The three critters discussed in the link below (as well as the one up topside) are further

With an abundance of material, I thought it best to combine links to these articles into one post. Each of these is a quick read but they have some interesting information about how paleontologists are baffled by new discoveries — including how one fossil blatantly defies deep-time reckoning. Credit: Pixabay /  GeorgeB2 Our first entry is about sex. Katie, bar the door! Just kidding. It's more about how difficult it is to determine the sex of dinosaurs. There have been many speculations over the years, but it's mighty difficult when all you have are bone fragments and fossils (reasonably complete skeletons are rare). Since paleontologists agree that dinosaurs were probably reptiles, perhaps a comparison with existing reptiles could help. Seems reasonable. Recently, a new study led by Queen Mary University of London concluded that dinosaur bones tell us little about their sexes. In the past, secular scientists have made various claims about the ability to make sex dete

While some dinosaurs were rather small, the ones that get our attention are the towering heavies. It is easy to assume that big creatures came from big eggs. Cartoons and dinosaur movies sometimes show extremely large eggs, but that is not the case. They hatched small and grew like other critters. What are the implications for Noah's Ark? Credit: Wikimedia Commons /  Palauenc05  ( CC BY-SA 3.0 ) An egg could not be the size of a typical human because the shell would necessarily be thick. In fact, it would be too think for the unhatched dinosaur to breath or even escape if it could breathe in the first place. Paleontologists have learned from fossils that, like humans and critters, dinosaurs had growth spurts in their younger years. Biblical creationists know that God brought animals to Noah. If you think about it, there would have been no reason to have the largest dinosaurs taking up a great deal of space on the Ark. They would have been juveniles, and after they disembAR

Pterosaurs have been interesting additions to movies about dinosaurs and such, and most of us probably can picture the winged reptiles. What may be less known is that there were many types. Big ones, little ones, many teeth, no teeth — in many parts of the world. Now paleontologists have added another one. Credit: Modified from an image at Wikimedia Commons by Antonio R. Mihaila ( CC BY-SA 4.0 ) The hands at the Darwin Ranch are so excited about this, they are going to add it to the festivities when they dance around the maypole. But they still don't know where to place it on the failed evolutionary tree, and have no evidence of its evolution. We may be tempted to say, "Big deal, another flying reptile". Well, it is a discovery, and we can expect additional news about recent pterosaur fossils because some are very well preserved and have soft tissues. That is always bad news for proponents of deep time because these critters were created far more recently than the

It is interesting to think of how critters lived before the Genesis Flood, especially those predators that would not take any guff off anyone. But like in the Old West movies where someone says, "This town ain't big enough for the both of us", there is no reason to think that the mean ones all lived in the same area. The Animals Entering Noah' Ark , Jacopo Bassano, 1570s Dinosaurs with sharp claws and (as Tim the Enchanter might say) nasty big pointy teeth. It may be fun to watch them strutting around looking for a fight like rival gang members, but is that plausible? We know from fossil evidence that there were some rip snortin' fights, but those were probably the exceptions. The same kind of safe distance thing can be inferred from predatory animals living today. A [CMI] reader from Ukraine, B.V., asks some interesting questions about what dinosaurs are found buried together and why. His message follows, with a response from Philip Bell, intended to prov

Believers in deep time are constantly denying facts as well as principles of science, giving them false confirmation of their biases. For example, despite all the dinosaur soft tissues and other remnants , the discovery of dinosaur DNA , and more, materialists have a "Whaddya know, that stuff does  last millions of years!" approach. The same thing is happening with the "oldest" biological pigments. Credit: Pexels /  Sharon McCutcheon  We've seen science denial (after all, the narrative trumps observed evidence) in the colors of dinosaurs and in dinosaur eggs . While this post is not about dinosaurs, these examples show how secularists clutch their pearls and deny inconvenient facts. It is no surprise that they believe the impossible about other biological pigments (perhaps they studied under Joe Biden at the University of Pennsylvania or something). Cyanobacteria were apparently the culprits that led to colors extracted from marine black shale, but the

New links added at the end of the post in mid-March 2020.  The atmosphere at the Darwin Ranch could accurately be described as subdued. Creationists have been trying to keep them honest, but evolutionists insist on their materialism and deep time beliefs despite science and logic. They have been faced with numerous refutations across the board, but what has been most devastating involves dinosaurs. Soft tissues were found that could not possibly have lasted for millions of Darwin years. Evolutionists then had to deal with intact skin, blood vessels, and proteins. Desperate rescuing devices ensued . Katie, bar the door! Now they are faced with dinosaur DNA, and not just dubious fragments. DNA cannot last for huge amounts of time. By the way, where did Jack Horner get his doctorate? Just joshin' with y'all, he doesn't have one. The secular science industry is committed to naturalism, and this makes it more difficult for them to find alternative explanations and more exc

Back in 1942, a small dinosaur skull was examined and classified as a relative of Tyrannosaurus rex. However, paleontologists did not have much to work with. Eventually, more parts were found as well as a nearly-complete skeleton in 2003 for Nanotyrannus . Upon further examination, it was determined that Nanotyrannus did not exist. Credit: Wikimedia Commons / MCDinosaurhunter ( CC by-SA 3.0 ) "You mean like Nanny Pelosi, Cowboy Bob?" Ummm...sure. While Nanotyrannus was not real under that name, it turns out that it was a teenager. The first of the two articles features is shorter and focuses on the error of growth rings, which seems similar to dendrochronology . Since dinosaurs were unique and there was a lack of data, it should not come as a surprise that this method failed. Young dinosaurs like this one are considered by many creationists to have been on Noah's Ark, and they would have matured after the Flood. A new analysis of a small pair of T. rex -like

Soft tissues of dinosaurs and other critters are becoming more and more common, and so are remnants that are termed spectacularly preserved. These are existential threats to universal common ancestor beliefs, as we will see in the three posts below. Faint not, brethren, most are not lengthy. Plesiosaur skeleton credit: Flickr / Kim Alaniz ( CC by 2.0 ) The first article is about the discovery of well-preserved brains and nerves in the Cambrian period. These things ought not to be because of the alleged long ages! Or is it because of global warming? Instead, fossils are showing great detail. It was thought by archaeologists — yes, I know, should be paleontologists, but the writers made the easy mistake — that soft tissues could not fossilize. Surprise! They could do that during the catastrophic processes of the Genesis Flood, and that is the best explanation. Exquisitely preserved fossils of Cambrian arthropods show minute details of brain and central nervous syste

When soft tissues of dinosaurs were discovered, they were considered oddities or misunderstood. Problems for secularists continued as more soft tissues were found as well as proteins, so rescuing devices were attempted. Another effort was made that does not bode well for evolutionary ideas. Count Krosstich told me that these folks have to deal with a great deal of cognitive dissonance . True, they are  presuming that dinosaur bones have been in the ground for millions of years, but also knowing that soft tissues and proteins cannot last anywhere near that long. The toast concept and  Maillard reactions have been invoked, but nothing popped up with them. New studies have tremendous flaws. These people should admit that the evidence supports recent creation and the global Genesis Flood of only a few thousand years ago. The latest fossil biochemistry paper, published in Scientific Reports , describes “blood vessel structures” recovered from inside a T. rex femur. This is the s

My old pal Miles Prower stopped by to let me know that the hands at the Darwin Ranch were cranking up the propaganda mill again, this time to give more fake news about fossilized dinosaur feathers. Here we go again. We saw that proponents of particles-to-paleontologist evolution are riding hard and fast to use  space aliens for propaganda , but they are especially enamored with using dinosaurs to promote evolution. People with a modicum of critical thinking skills and some degree of science knowledge should be able to see that this report is nonsense. Assembled with components from  Clker  clipart One significant problem here is the same as we experience at The Question Evolution Project  — a frustration common to Page owners. Namely, lack of reading. People see headlines and summaries but tend to avoid actually reading the material and thinking about the poor science and reasoning involved. Ride up on the hill for the bigger view. What did they find? Fossils of feathers. W

While scientists can learn a great deal from fossils, they do not give many of the finer details. With improving technology plus dinosaur bones being discovered and analyzed, more can be learned. Back in 1842, Richard Owen formed the word dinosauria from Greek words for "fearful" and "lizard". He could tell that they were reptiles. Credit: RGBStock / Adrian van Leen Evolutionists get on the prod when recent creation is discussed, especially when dinosaur soft tissues support recent creation . They keep on trying to find ways to make them seem millions of years old despite the evidence (because the Bearded Buddha required deep time to work his magic). Researchers managed to confirm what we already know: dinosaurs were cold-blooded reptiles. Years ago, I was working a desk job and the manager put a big lizard nearby. It kept watching my every move. I asked why this was happening, and I was told that it was a monitor lizard. "That's dreadful, Cowboy

The hands at the Darwin Ranch are trying to cook up another rescuing device to avoid the young earth implications of dinosaur soft tissues and proteins. Soft tissues in dinosaur bones have been a cause of consternation among believers in deep time. The toast idea was crummy from the get-go, but that does not stop determined evolutionists from tweaking it for dinosaur proteins, nosiree! Made at PhotoFunia with an image on Pixabay by Ralph While Maillard reactions are just ducky when they put a crust on toast and do tasty things with food, the very nature of the effect requires somewhat high temperatures. (By the way, the L in Maillard is not pronounced.) Desperate evolutionists try to explain the preservation of proteins through this process, but thinking people are able to easily determine four reasons that this preservation explanation can be relegated to the fake news trash can. If secular scientists started from the fact that the world was created recently, they would be mo